Buller v. Sidell
| Decision Date | 11 June 1890 |
| Citation | 43 F. 116 |
| Parties | BULLER v. SIDELL et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Frank Budd, for plaintiff.
Thomas N. Browne and Olcott, Meatre & Gonzales, for defendants.
LACOMBE, J., (after stating the facts as above.)
The first paragraph of the answer denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the recovery of the judgment sued upon. Inasmuch as it appears by the defendants' own papers that they entered a general appearance by attorney in the Kansas action, this paragraph must be stricken out as sham. Roblin v. Long, 60 How.Pr. 200; Beebe v. Marvin, 17 Abb.Pr. 194. The second paragraph of the answer merely denies indebtedness.
It should also be stricken out. Mills v. Duryee, 7 Cranch, 481. Inasmuch as it is not disputed that the Kansas court had jurisdiction, and that the defendants had notice of the proceedings therein, the defense set up in the third paragraph of the answer is plainly an equitable one. Christmas v. Russell, 5 Wall. 290; Allison v. Chapman, 19 F. 488. Equitable defenses cannot, however, be set up in actions at law in the federal courts. Bennett v. Butterworth, 11 How. 669; Montejo v. Owen, 14 Blatchf. 324; Parsons v. Denis, 7 Fed.Rep. 317; Doe v. Roe, 31 F. 97. This paragraph must therefore be stricken out.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mau v. Stoner
...and thus a most important issue in this case could have been disposed of on the pleadings. (Mulcahy v. Buckley, 100 Cal. 484; Buller v. Sidell, 43 F. 116; Roblin Long, 60 How. Pr., 200; Union Co. v. Chippewa, 47 Wis. 246.) Possession and ownership of land may be proven by parol. (DeWold v. ......
-
Fred W. Wolf Co. v. Northwestern Dairy Co.
... ... in issue no fact alleged. Lightner v. Menzel, 35 ... Cal. 452; Nelson v. Murray, 23 Cal. 338; Buller ... v. Sidell (C. C.) 43 F. 116; Watson v. Lemen, 9 ... Colo. 200, 11 P. 88. The denial of indebtedness is merely a ... denial of a ... ...
-
Peacock v. United States
... ... recognized and enforced by the courts. Denver R.L. Co. v ... Union Pacific (C.C.) 34 F. 386, 390; Buller v ... Sidell (C.C.) 43 F. 116; Gilchrist v. Helena S. & ... S.R. Co. (C.C.) 47 F. 593; Tabor v. Commercial Nat ... Bank, 62 F. 383, 387, 10 ... ...
-
Boggs v. Wann
...above stated, if it is a defense at all, is an equitable defense, which cannot be made in a suit at law in the federal courts. Buller v. Sidell, 43 F. 116; Doe v. Roe, 31 F. 97; Parsons v. Denis, Fed. 317; Bennett v. Butterworth, 11 How. 669. The case of Judy v. Louderman, 48 Ohio St. 562, ......